THE PROBLEM OF THE INTERPRETATION OF HAMANN Johann Georg Hamann is an intriguing but poorly known figure in the contemporary intellectual world. Yet this is the man whom Kierkegaard saluted as "Emperor!", whose writings were to have been arranged for publication by none other than Goethe himself, and whom Dilthey numbered among the primordial figures in the rise of modern historical consciousness. There are reasons for the persistence of this general ignorance. Hamann is deep. And, in addition, there is his (...) forbidding style. The readers of Kierkegaard and Dilthey, two other giants who them selves achieved late recognition, have not had to face this kind of imposing obstacle. Not only does Hamann expect his readers to handle themselves in deep water, but to intuit their way between his ideas which bob up like islands with no visible connection between them. Like Kierkegaard too, Hamann has had his troubles with the public. He himself referred to the hope that he would be understood by a "better posterity". In fact only the last few years have seen the printing of some of his more controversial writings, in particular his theories on the nature of human sexuality. (shrink)

Received interpretation. As far as I have been able to determine, all scholars who have dealt with this fragment have followed Plutarch in holding that.

This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain (...) in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

This introductory chapter briefly surveys the main philosophical developments of the nineteenth century, contextualising the chapters that follow. Separate sections outline the principal elements of debate for each of the volume’s six sections: Logic and scientific method, metaphysics, science and philosophy, ethical, social and political thought, religious philosophy, and the practice of philosophy.

In the fields of metaphysics and epistemology, ethics and political thought, idealism can generate controversy and disagreement. This title is part of the Idealism series, which finds in idealism new features of interest and a perspective which is germane to our own philosophical concerns.

A major new source for research of the 19th century and history of ideas, this dictionary covers all of the major, and a range of the less well-known, thinkers and writers of the time.

Gelfond and Lifschitz proposed the notion of a stable model of a logic program. We establish that the set of all stable models in a Herbrand universe of a recursive logic program is, up to recursive renaming, the set of all infinite paths of a recursive, countably branching tree, and conversely. As a consequence, the problem, given a recursive logic program, of determining whether it has at least one stable model, is Σ11-complete. Due to the equivalences established in the authors' (...) previous nonmonotone rule systems papers ), this applies equally to truth maintenance systems and default logics. (shrink)

Let all finite sequences of letters of the English alphabet be ordered serially so that shorter sequences precede longer ones, and sequences of the same length are ordered alphabetically. Thus, an ordinal number is assigned to every possible English sentence of finite length. Among these numbers, some--call them S-numbers --will be the numbers of sentences which are instructions for writing down an infinite sequence of numbers. Now, it is impossible to state, in an English sentence of finite length, a generally (...) applicable procedure for determining whether an arbitrarily given number is an S-number. (shrink)